It was just after the 1988 Republican convention ended. I was on the plane, as a speechwriter, that took Republican presidential nominee George H.W. Bush, and the new vice presidential nominee, Dan Quayle, from New Orleans, the site of the convention, to Indiana. Sitting next to Mr. Quayle was the other senator from that state, Richard Lugar. As we chatted, I thought, "Why him and not him?" Why Mr. Quayle as the choice, and not the more experienced Mr. Lugar? I came to think, in following years, that some of the reason came down to what is now called The Narrative. The story the campaign wishes to tell about itself, and communicate to others. I don't like the idea of The Narrative. I think it is ... a barnyard epithet. And, oddly enough, it is something that Republicans are not very good at, because it's not where they live, it's not what they're about, it's too fancy. To the extent the McCain campaign was thinking in these terms, I don't like that either. I do like Mrs. Palin, because I like the things she espouses. And because, frankly, I met her once and liked her. I suspect, as I say further in here, that her candidacy will be either dramatically successful or a dramatically not; it won't be something in between.

But, bottom line, I am certainly sorry I blurted my barnyard ephithet...

There are more inexplicable wrinkles to the story in Noonan's full telling (link below), but the point is: Yes, she thinks Palin is a bullshit pick, and she doesn't mind doing a little bullshit rhetorical dance to try and placate her conservative benefactors without actually backing off her statement.

[WSJ]

Top Gun, the nickname for the Navy fighter pilot school made famous in the Tom Cruise movie of the same name, originally used the A-4 to simulate Russian MiGs. The key attribute for a "fighter," according to widely recognized definitions, is high speed and maneuverability and weapons designed to shoot down enemy aircraft.

The A-4 proved itself fast and maneuverable at Top Gun, as well as in the service of the Navy's Blue Angels precision-flying team, but in neither of those cases did the aircraft carry any weapons. But it was built to do so. All versions of the aircraft can carry Sidewinder air-to-air missiles for self defense, according to Bill Gunston and Mike Spick's excellent "Modern Air Combat." And they often did, for example in the service of the Israeli Air Force, where an A-4 shot down a Syrian MiG-17 during the Yom Kippur war. Boom, fighter!

The authoritative Jane's military book series calls the A-4 an "attack bomber" in its "Encyclopedia Of Aviation" while Gunston and Spick call it a "versatile little attack bomber."

But! "The World's Great Attack Aircraft," a nifty guide published by W. H. Smith's Gallery imprint, refers to the plane as a "versatile little fighter-bomber."

The Times should not be so easily cowed, particularly when 12 years worth of coverage is at stake. The newspaper no doubt did its own investigation, and "attack aircraft" is a more appropriate term for the A-4 than "fighter" — it's not the "F-4" after all — but there's no need to backtrack from using a perfectly accurate alternative name.

Oh, right, the other amazing correction. That would be one to a review of West Side Story published in 1960:

A listing of credits on April 28, 1960, with a theater review of “West Side Story” on its return to the Winter Garden theater, misstated the surname of the actor who played Action. He is George Liker, not Johnson. (Mr. Liker, who hopes to audition for a role in a Broadway revival of the show planned for February, brought the error to The Times’s attention last month. )

That one is just a bit more cut-and-dried.

[Times]

A tipster wrote in to point out that the new photo we found is probably not of Banksy, the artist; it's of Banxy, the break dancer. Well who the fuck can keep track, really? Banxy is a dancer and performer in the UK who once appeared in a dance TV show with Deborah Bull, the British ballet dancer who appears with "Banksy" in this photo:

Here's a photo of Banxy, the dancer:

So, it's likely that the photographer who took the 1999 photos we found from Rex photo service simply heard "Banxy," assumed that it was the famous artist, and labeled the photos as such. Well, screw it. OUR BAD. We'll keep looking.

[Banxy]

Ha ha, let us "say for the record," from one spelling-challenged editor to another: you will never live this down. Ever.

[Regret The Error]

Because of an editing error, the TV Watch Column on Wednesday, comparing coverage of Senator Barack Obama’s trip overseas with coverage of Senator John McCain, gave an incorrect title in some copies for a Frankie Valli song used in a video by the McCain campaign to mock reporters’ coverage of Mr. Obama’s trip. The song is “Can’t Take My Eyes Off You” — not “Can’t Take My Eyes Off of You.”

Looks like her new dedication to caring enough to get things mostly right most of the time is paying off! (Oh, and the "forthcoming" correction was probably this one, which ran one day after that Stanley item. Hah.) [NYT]

After being booted from American Media last month (after lying about it in a rather terrible way), Fuller is now in the midst of some vague web project, bankrolled by former Viacom exec Russ Pillar. The revolutionary idea:

Mr. Pillar says his company, the 5850 Group, is seeking to raise "tens of millions" to back Ms. Fuller as a brand: she has created a company called Bonnie Fuller Media, based in New York. He says the start-up will be heavily digital and offer a variety of femme-friendly products that will include, but not be limited to, gossip, fashion and romance.

Stop the motherfucking presses! If Bonnie Fuller even has a serious plan for what this new, derivative digital project will consist of, we will personally eat a shoe (send over the plan to collect on that, Bonnie). Further, the Times David Carr, while acknowledging that other people have serious problems with Fuller, is personally pleased as punch with her, and says as much both implicitly and explicitly:

Ms. Fuller has created a frothy world, and, like it or not, we all live in it...

That prurient need to know just a little more is pure Bonnie Fuller...

Yes, celebrities have always been with us, but not quite in the way they are now since Ms. Fuller rethought them as familiars, our fake friends whom we can slag or praise, depending on the moment...

AT the moment of her disenfranchisement last month, many publishing insiders could barely hide their glee, although they still sought the cloak of anonymity because Ms. Fuller is the queen of second acts. They hate not only the game — readers at all costs — but also the player...

Having covered Ms. Fuller on and off for the last eight years in her various jobs, I have never been a Bonnie Fuller hater. (Of course, I never worked for her.) For one thing, she has a lack of pretension, an ability to size herself, that's rare in publishing. And on technical magazine matters, she has few peers. She can dig into the relationship between a magazine and its readers with a rare kind of intuition.

Bonnie Fuller: A publishing world hero deserving of praise. Her opponents are straight up haters! And she can sell magazines, so she deserves our respect. And the blog hate—sympathy, please!

Of course, it's worth pointing out that she is sorely lacking in self-awareness, sorely lacking in self-awareness, and sorely lacking in self-awareness.

And Fuller's most passionate defender in the story? Former Star editor and Asshat Joe Dolce. Not interviewed: her ex-assistants. That pretty much says it all.

[NYT]

Obviously some mistakes are never corrected, even when we make fun of them. Also:

Then again, this entire item could end up requiring an asterisk. "I'd hate to stand corrected, but I think your count could prove wrong," says Stanley. "There could be one coming in the next few days — [it's] still under study."

What is this about? Anyone?

The original correspondence:

Replied-to-all Alex Witchel, the article's author:


Uh oh! replies Times Research Editor Anaheed Alani, "I think this know-it-all might be right"!

In Weekend TV (times2, May 5) we incorrectly suggested that David Gest had been given herpes by Liza Minnelli on their wedding night. This was entirely wrong. David Gest has never had the disease and has never actually accused Ms Minnelli of giving it to him. We apologise to Mr Gest for any embarrassment or distress caused by this mistake.

[Times via Regret the Error]

In The Independent Extra on 18 March 2008, we incorrectly suggested that David Gest had alleged that Liza Minnelli gave him herpes. Mr Gest has told us, which we accept, that he did not make any such allegation and that he has never had the disease. We apologise to Mr Gest for any embarrassment or distress caused by this mistake.

[Independent via RTE]

So, one last time: he never had the disease. He did, though, get beat up by Liza Minnelli.

Post hack Steve Dunleavy, of course, was a legendary drunk. Page Six chief Richard Johnson had his own DUI, complete with a refusal to take a Breathalyzer test—a wise legal move known to many veteran drunk drivers. Staffer Hasani Gittens, we hear, "drinks like a fish," is an incessant gambler, and carries the nickname "Handsome Lyle" (all of which are things to be respected).

Further: Page Six's Chris Wilson is a boozer, his colleague Paula Froelich carries on with drunken midgets, and we've always suspected that the entire paper gets so soused on New Year's eve that they just toss any old thing in there the next day.

But the man who sets the tone is the paper's top dog, editor Col Allan. He must have been drunk as hell when he decided it would be a good idea to take the Australian prime minister to Scores for a night of booze and strippers. Of course, Allan is impervious to hangovers, as well. He should be, since his reputation as a lush is legendary:

At the Post, the party is slightly out of control, which is part of the fun, both for readers and reporters. The paper is aggressive, uninhibited, unpredictable, prone to anger and sometimes juvenile comedy in equal measure. Heroic consumption of alcohol has long been a part of this equation, but even in this tradition Allan stands out. "Col is a very engaging man," says his sometime dinner companion Graydon Carter. "And he can drink just about anybody I know, with the exception of Christopher Hitchens, under many tables. He's got real Aussie blood in him."

So, Sue Simmons: don't feel too bad.

An article on March 27 reported on a virus, infectious salmon anemia, or I.S.A., killing millions of salmon cultivated for export by Chile's salmon farming industry. It quoted an official at the port of Castro, Chile, describing bags of fish food stored at the facility by Marine Harvest, a Norwegian company, as containing antibiotics, pigments and hormones. The official, Adolfo Flores, identified himself as the port director. He in fact worked as a security guard, The Times learned subsequently. Had The Times been aware of his actual position at the time, it would not have cited him as an authority on the contents of the bags, which were labeled medicated food. The article also should have noted that Marine Harvest and SalmonChile, an industry association, deny that they use hormones or that the pigments they use pose any risk to consumers.

[Via Portfolio]

A headline and an article on Monday about a Vanity Fair photograph showing the actress Miley Cyrus in a suggestive pose left the incorrect impression that she was bare-breasted. While the pose was indeed revealing, she was wrapped in what appeared to be a bedsheet; she was not topless.

Did Disney complain? Or Billy Ray? Surely they wouldn't give a shit if Conde Nast called. Regardless—it's official. Topless Miley Cyrus was wearing a bedsheet, and therefore not topless. So STOP SAYING IT.

An obituary in some editions on Sunday and in some copies on Monday about the actor Charlton Heston misstated his given name at birth. It was John Charles Carter, not Charlton Carter.

A front-page obituary and a headline in some editions on Sunday about the actor Charlton Heston misstated his age and the year of his birth. He was 84, not 83, and was born in 1923, not 1924.

And a list of Mr. Heston's films accompanying the obituary on Monday misstated the relationship between two characters in the film "Midway," in which Mr. Heston played a Naval officer. The characters, the officer's son and a woman of Japanese descent, are hoping to marry; they are not already married.

The obituary also referred incorrectly to the character played by Orson Welles in the film "Touch of Evil," in which Mr. Heston had a starring role. The character, Quinlan, is a police captain, not a sheriff.

Crossroads School: A Feb. 19 story about Crossroads School head Roger Weaver stepping down included a comment from Weaver that the book “Hollywood, Interrupted: Insanity Chic in Babylon — The Case Against Celebrity” — which includes allegations of student sex- and drug-fueled scandals at Crossroads — was filled with fabrications. The article should have included comment as well from Mark C. Ebner, one of the book’s authors, who denies that the book contains fabrications. The Times regrets the error.

[Regret the Error]

"A picture last Sunday with an essay about a crack house in Fort Greene, Brooklyn, was published in error. The three houses in the picture are on the same street as the crack house, but none of the three figured in the essay." The photo's been removed from the original article online. Good thing we grabbed it. [NYT]

An article on Monday about a popular Internet video prank known as rickrolling referred incorrectly to its use during a March 8 women's basketball game at Eastern Washington University, based on information provided by Pawl Fisher, a student; Davin Perry, who shoots game videos for the university; and Dave Cook, its sports information director. The stunt, which involves a person lip-synching the 1980s hit song "Never Gonna Give You Up" while dressed as the British singer Rick Astley, was performed before the start of four separate basketball games, and the pranksters distilled the performances into a YouTube video. The March 8 game, between Eastern Washington and Montana State, was not interrupted by a performance. (Go to Article)

This is nearly as embarrassing as when the Times was forced to reveal in a lengthy editor's note that star reporter Judy Miller's investigation into whether or not it was a trap was heavily influenced by deceptive off-the-record quotes from the Bush administration's Supreme Commander of the Coalition of the Willing Fleet, Admiral Ackbar.

Corrections [NYT]

The unfortunate forgot-you-were-dead San Antonio Express-News wasn't the only one screwing up this week.

*Newsday wants to make sure you know exactly where a man charged with stalking lives, so in Tuesday editions, they corrected his house number, which they got wrong the first time around. Happy hunting! [Newsday]

*The Los Angeles Times is no homewrecker: "A Critic's Notebook in Sunday's Arts & Music section said that the late pianist and composer Ervin Nyiregyházi probably had an affair with the wife of conductor Artur Rodzinski. He did not." Good to know! [LAT]

[San Antonio Express-News]

—-— Original Message —-— From: Begala, Paul To: Garrett, Major Sent: Tue Jan 08 14:18:37 2008 Subject: N.H.D. Major, I know you're swamped, and I hate to bother you on such a busy news day, but whoever told you I am joining Hillary's campaign fed you some bum info. It's just not true. Or as I say to my boys, N.H.D. Not. Happening. Dude. I'm not coming in as a volunteer, or as an adviser, or as a strategist or anything else. I have contributed to her campaign, and am convinced she would be a great President. But I am not joining the campaign in any form or fashion. Again, I know how busy you are, but I'd sure appreciate you checking with me before you go with a story about me. This email is always a good way to reach me. Thanks a lot. All best,

Paul Begala

________________________________

From: Garrett, Major
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 2:31 PM
To: Begala, Paul
Subject: Re: N.H.D.

Paul:
I genuinely appreciate the e-mail.
I will take it under advisement.
And I look forward to discussing all aspects of the campaign with you in the future.
All best,
Major

Major Garrett, Congressional Correspondent, Fox News

—-— Original Message —-—
From: Begala, Paul
To: Garrett, Major
Sent: Tue Jan 08 15:18:16 2008
Subject: RE: N.H.D.

Major,

Just heard you say I was on a conference call with Hillary's campaign yesterday. That's not true. I was not on any conference call with Hillary's campaign - and have had no contact with her campaign for months. No one from her campaign has contacted me — nor have I contacted them — and I am not joining in any capacity, paid or unpaid, official or unofficial. I feel like that old Lorrie Morgan song, "What part of 'no' don't you understand?"

I have a lot of respect for you, and I like you, but I've got to ask you again to check with me before you go with a story about me. Someone is misleading you, and it is not me.

Again, I know the challenges of 24-hour news, and this is a crazy environment, but you can almost always reach me at this email address.

All best,

Paul

From: Garrett, Major
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 3:32 PM
To: Begala, Paul
Subject: Re: N.H.D.

Paul:
You know me well enough to know I am not trying to screw you.
You also know, or should know, that I'm careful and don't have a reputation for pulling stories out of my ass.
I'm not now. The sourcing is strong, very strong, or I wouldn't go with it.
I appreciate your e-mails and I redouble my efforts with each one I receive.
Please feel free to call me at any hour of any day.

Best,
Major

Major Garrett, Congressional Correspondent, Fox News

—-— Original Message —-—
From: Begala, Paul
To: Garrett, Major
Sent: Tue Jan 08 15:41 2008
Subject: RE: N.H.D.

Major,

Thanks so much for getting back to me. I do know you, and I like and respect you. You know me as well, and I would not lie to you, would not mislead you. And I am telling you that whoever told you I was on a conference call with Hillary's campaign was wrong. I'm quite sure that you're not making this up, so please don't misunderstand me. No doubt someone is telling you this stuff about me. It's just not true.

If my wife hears one more report that I'm joining Hillary's campaign I'm going to have to go in the Pundit Protection Program.

Thanks,

Paul

This strawman of "regular, everyday people" of the awesome Heather's is ludicrous—we only write about public figures. (Fun fact: In the fameball internet reality show age, more people than ever work to make themselves public figures!) Who's an everyday person? A chest-baring T.V. talking head and her millionaire boyfriend, who was the subject of a long New Yorker profile? A Pulitzer-prize winning author and his Ted Turner-loving wife? A man who set up a website that obsessively chronicles his every appearance as an extra in a Hollywood film? Bridezillas who crave wedding coverage in the New York Times? Anyone who puts more than five pictures of himself on Facebook? Anyone who's auditioned for a reality show? Anyone with a blog?

As for David Brooks, there are at least three errors in those four sentences, two of them of omission or lack of qualification. It's definitely not my place to get into the Byzantries [NOT A WORD! But you know what I mean, no? Paging Grant Barrett!] of our pay system. Let's just say this place pays better for young word-folks than the publication for which he phones in columns and leave it at that.

And from Kevin Mercuri, a senior VP at 5W, comes this email:

"Regarding the Joe Francis entry, don't believe everything you read. Sitrick didn't garner this Sunday's Style piece, the 5W Public Relations team did. We've been placing him on Nightline, Greta Van Susteren and roughly thirty national and regional radio shows every week, and we've been pitching Mareya Navarro and just about every other applicable journalist. I could even connect you with Joe Francis (yes, from Jail) to back up the story that 5W is getting him coverage, not Sitrick."

Wow, thanks! That won't be necessary.

According to the third roommate involved, actually, NO ONE WAS HOME. Says the roommate:

Everybody was at work, and we're not sure why they wrote that. The police didn't seem to be confused about it. We thought it was funny. Maybe they were trying to sell more papers?